Disposed

L.Lalitha, v. The Registrar

Madras HC18 Nov 2021WP/39727/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses a writ petition seeking mandamus to direct the Registrar, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, to decide a pending appeal filed under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act. The Court noted a five-year delay and directed the respondent to verify the appeal's status and dispose of it expeditiously if pending.

What did the court decide?

The first respondent to verify if the appeal is pending; if so, dispose of it expeditiously. If disposed, no further order.

L.Lalitha, Vs The Registrar — RTI and Transparency | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18-11-2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

WP No.39727 of 2016

¶6

L.Lalitha ...Petitioner vs.

¶7

The Registrar, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, No.2, Sir Thiyagaraya Salai, Near Alai Amman Koil Street, Teynampet,

¶8

Chennai – 18.

¶9

The Appellate Authority cum Tamil Nadu Railway Police Office, EVR Salai Mahaveer Colony, Egmore, Chennai – 8.

¶10

The Public Information Officer cum Tamil Nadu Railway Police Office, EVR Salai Mahaveer Colony, Egmore, Chennai – 8.

¶11

...Respondents

¶12

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass order on the Appeal dated 08.08.2016 preferred by the petitioner under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Saravanan

¶14

For Respondent-1: Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan for M/s.G.R.Associates.

¶15

For Respondents-2 and 3: No Appearance

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the first respondent to pass orders on the Appeal dated 08.08.2016 preferred by the petitioner under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act.

¶19

2. The writ petition was filed in the year 2016 and five years have lapsed.

¶20

3. Under these circumstances, the first respondent is directed to verify if the said appeal is pending or not and if the same is pending, then it is to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. On the other hand, if it is already disposed of, no further order sought to be communicated to the petitioner.

¶21

4. With the abovesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

s/d-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶26

Svn

¶27

¶28

The Registrar, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, No.2, Sir Thiyagaraya Salai, Near Alai Amman Koil Street, Teynampet,

¶29

Chennai – 18.

¶30

The Appellate Authority cum Tamil Nadu Railway Police Office, EVR Salai Mahaveer Colony, Egmore, Chennai – 8.

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶32

The Public Information Officer cum Tamil Nadu Railway Police Office, EVR Salai Mahaveer Colony, Egmore, Chennai – 8. +1 CC to M/s.GR Associates sr 59561 +1 CC to Mr.G. Pugazhenthi, Advocate sr 60114.

¶33

W.P.39727 of 2016

¶34

KG(CO) SP(30/11/2021)

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

L.Lalitha, v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Lalitha, v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.a.Parasuraman, Vs the Chairman

M/s.Harihar Alloys Private Ltd. Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and

R.Balaji Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Nabeel Nazar, Vs the Registrar

Sre Venkatachalapathy Textiles Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and

P.v.Unnikrishnan, Vs Union Territory of Puducherry